If switching apps at this point (or other system operation I suppose), i.e. cmd-tab, then when going back to Dorico, the Panel is gone and the Empty-handed Player is left over, which then has to have an instrument assigned, or be deleted to redo the process (with the scary warning about This Will Delete All Parts, etc).
Basically the helper Panel should not disappear like that, leaving an unexpected Empty-handed Player.
I agree with this. Sometimes I change my mind, such as deciding that I want a solo player vs a section player, or a section player instead of solo; OR I decide I wish to use the build menu or vice-versa.
In any case, if you press the escape key to close out of the pop-up window, it always leaves an empty-handed player which I then have to manually delete. I feel like escaping out of the pop-up window without having made a selection should nullify and cancel the player altogether, as expected from UIs in general when you “quit” a window or operation.
Humans are allowed to change their mind on the type of player they wish to add, so until I confirm an instrument selection or build, I don’t see that as an explicit creation. It does not make sense to me that if you go to add an ensemble player, but then upon further consideration decide a solo player would suit your composition best, so you escape out of that new player window, that the empty player should remain.
If you go to add a new track in any DAW, such as Cubase, it gives you a myriad of track types. But here’s the thing which we all expect from UIs in general - if you escape out of that window, you are effectively exiting and not confirming the process of adding a track. It would be unexpected and unnecessary if you exit the add track window by way of close or escape, and Cubase just adds a track anyway on the basis of, “well, you opened the add track window, so clearly you wanted a track, and since you didn’t confirm the process, we just added one anyway.”
Dorico allows you to create an empty-handed player (for legitimate reasons). That a DAW might not allow you to do this, is a limitation of the DAW.
Similarly DAWs might not allow a track to hold multiple other tracks, whereas Dorico allows you put as many instruments as you like in a single player.
When you choose to create a Player, clicking on Add Single/Section Player is already the explicit creation of it. In the instrument list that comes after, the Add button is referred to the instrument that you can choose for the already created player, is not referred to the Player itself.
Edit: this is confirmed by the fact that if you choose Add Ensemble (where you can create Players and Instruments simultaneously), it doesn’t create anything till you choose witch instruments/players and click on Add .
So Dorico gives this opportunity: "Ok, I have 6 Persons that can play, I can create first the Empty Players, and if I wish at a later point, I can subdivide and distribute the needed instruments among them. I think this is really nice thought out.
This is just an example of UI design. I could mention a word processor, an email client, a video editor, or a calendar. If you were to open a pop-up window to create literally anything, whether an email draft or a calendar event, change your mind and press the escape key, invariably the expected behavior is to nullify the process (I mean the key is literally called escape). I don’t think this comparison is wild as it pretty standard UI behavior across all facets of computing and software.
People change their mind. I wouldn’t see the harm in the escape key cancelling the process.
Ah, put that way, I do see your point, but I still kind of think escape or an [ x ] button should cancel the process, since that is what one would expect when a pop-up window occurs for creating something (in literally anything or any software). Or hell, even a “cancel” button could be added! (Though of course this doesn’t solve or address OP’s original issue of leaving the window briefly)
There are valid reasons for being able to create empty players. As I already stated, if you want e.g. a piano reduction player that’s going to appear in a choral score but not the orchestral score, adding the piano instrument will automatically add that instrument to the full score layout, and prompt Dorico to recalculate the entire full score layout. This is undesirable if significant layout work has been done on that layout. This can be avoided by adding an empty-handed player, unassigning it from the full score layout, then handing it a piano instrument.
The instruments list that appear after creating a new Player, works like a contextual menu (as if you in any app click the right mouse button on an object, to make some choice): in all apps that I use, if I open a contextual menu, then go away from the app and come back, then the menu disappears. And, as I wrote before, the Player was already been created as you choose to do so, before you Add instrumen/s to it: so it stays, but it’s “contextual menu” disappears.
No, because the dialog/dialogue warns also about the layout/s to witch the player can be assigned: even if the player is empty you can have it being assigned to some other part layout (beyond the automatically created empty-handed player part layout): and the three choices that Dorico gives when you want to delete the empty-handed player are very logical and useful.
If that is too much work, I feel bad for you. I do not see why Dorico should redesign the program when someone cannot make up their mind what they want to do.
I’m not in a position to check right now, but off the top of my head I’m pretty sure Cmd/Ctrl-Z will delete an empty player (assuming that creating it was the last thing you did) without the scary warning. Am I right?
My “norm” is in fact the normal in literally all types of software. I’ve never known the escape key to not escape and cancel out an operation. Why would the idea of finessing this UI experience be so bothersome to many of you? Would it make it harder for you to compose if you hit escape and your empty-player wasn’t sitting there, empty? It seems like a weird and rather stubborn thing to cling to.
It’s not a huge deal to me, but a minor distraction which can needlessly disrupt the creative flow, especially if I change my mind from the type of player I wish to create. Really just a minor suggestion to how the software experience could be more overall fluid, but not a hill I’m willing to die on. This forum can make it difficult to offer constructive feedback for the program without being met by someone who will say something to the effect of “but that’s just how it is! it just takes a few more clicks! how lazy!”
